Systematic review with network meta-analysis: comparative effectiveness and safety of strategies for preventing NSAID-associated gastrointestinal toxicity
Published 2016 View Full Article
- Home
- Publications
- Publication Search
- Publication Details
Title
Systematic review with network meta-analysis: comparative effectiveness and safety of strategies for preventing NSAID-associated gastrointestinal toxicity
Authors
Keywords
-
Journal
ALIMENTARY PHARMACOLOGY & THERAPEUTICS
Volume 43, Issue 12, Pages 1262-1275
Publisher
Wiley
Online
2016-04-28
DOI
10.1111/apt.13642
References
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Related references
Note: Only part of the references are listed.- Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Relatively Selective COX-2 Inhibitors Versus Coxibs for the Prevention of NSAID-Induced Gastrointestinal Injury
- (2015) Man Yang et al. MEDICINE
- Dosage Effects of Histamine-2 Receptor Antagonist on the Primary Prophylaxis of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug (NSAID)-Associated Peptic Ulcers: A Retrospective Cohort Study
- (2014) Ying He et al. DRUG SAFETY
- Cyclooxygenase-2 selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (etodolac, meloxicam, celecoxib, rofecoxib, etoricoxib, valdecoxib and lumiracoxib) for osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and economic evaluation
- (2014) Y Chen et al. HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT
- Indirect Treatment Comparison/Network Meta-Analysis Study Questionnaire to Assess Relevance and Credibility to Inform Health Care Decision Making: An ISPOR-AMCP-NPC Good Practice Task Force Report
- (2014) Jeroen P. Jansen et al. VALUE IN HEALTH
- A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis
- (2014) M. A. Puhan et al. BMJ-British Medical Journal
- Multinational, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, prospective study of esomeprazole in the prevention of recurrent peptic ulcer in low-dose acetylsalicylic acid users: the LAVENDER study
- (2013) Kentaro Sugano et al. GUT
- Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 3
- (2013) Sofia Dias et al. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING
- Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 4
- (2013) Sofia Dias et al. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING
- Comparison of gastrointestinal adverse effects between cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and non-selective, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs plus proton pump inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- (2012) Saharat Jarupongprapa et al. JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Evidence Synthesis for Decision Making 2
- (2012) Sofia Dias et al. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING
- Double-Blind Randomized Trials of Single-Tablet Ibuprofen/High-Dose Famotidine vs. Ibuprofen Alone for Reduction of Gastric and Duodenal Ulcers
- (2011) Loren Laine et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Mixed treatment comparison analysis provides internally coherent treatment effect estimates based on overviews of reviews and can reveal inconsistency
- (2010) Deborah M. Caldwell et al. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
- Celecoxib versus omeprazole and diclofenac in patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis (CONDOR): a randomised trial
- (2010) Francis KL Chan et al. LANCET
- Guidelines for Prevention of NSAID-Related Ulcer Complications
- (2009) Frank L Lanza et al. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
- Endoscopic Ulcers Are Neither Meaningful Nor Validated as a Surrogate for Clinically Significant Upper Gastrointestinal Harm
- (2009) David Y. Graham Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology
- Recommendations for use of selective and nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs: An American College of Rheumatology white paper
- (2008) ARTHRITIS AND RHEUMATISM
- The Relative Efficacies of Gastroprotective Strategies in Chronic Users of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs
- (2008) Laura E. Targownik et al. GASTROENTEROLOGY
Create your own webinar
Interested in hosting your own webinar? Check the schedule and propose your idea to the Peeref Content Team.
Create NowBecome a Peeref-certified reviewer
The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.
Get Started